The 1944 GI Bill was a transformative piece of legislation, creating a bridge to the middle class for an entire generation of veterans who suddenly found themselves able to go to college and buy homes.

Congressional attempts to reinvigorate and update the GI Bill to benefit veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan could have the same door-opening effect.

It is an effort that deserves support.

Unfortunately, it is getting bogged down in a tangle of partisan politics and opposition from some of the most flag-waving, war-supporting people in Washington, D.C.

President Bush has threatened to veto such legislation, saying a tax increase to pay for veterans benefits would be unacceptable.

Make no mistake, it would be expensive. Aid for veterans who enlisted after the Sept. 11 attacks would cost the country an estimated $5.2 billion a year. Still, that’s less than what we spend in two weeks in Iraq.

How is it possible that Bush, who has presided over runaway deficits, can suddenly find his moral compass on spending with this issue?

Unbelievable.

First of all, those who have volunteered to serve deserve our help when they decide to rebuild a life after their service. They put most of their life on hold when they’re in the service.

Second, the cost of supporting veterans — the measure in Congress would essentially provide a free four-year college education at a public university — pales in comparison to the cost of the war. Estimates vary widely, but the Congressional Budget Office puts the total war cost number between $1 trillion and $2 trillion.

Despite the veto threat, the GI Bill moved forward last week with the House approving the measure and a tax on the wealthy to pay for it.

Individuals would pay a surcharge tax of 0.47 percent on income above $500,000. For a couple, it would apply to those with incomes above $1 million.

The extra money in the GI Bill would be money well spent, not just for those individuals who served our nation, but for the nation as a whole.

Some have argued that an expanded GI Bill would lure active-duty members away from service and diminish the numbers of enlisted, eventually hurting an already stretched armed forces.

That’s a short-sighted view, and we actually think it could serve as a plum to attract people to enlist. Certainly, it would be a greater incentive than the current GI Bill, which hasn’t kept up with the rising cost of college.

The new GI Bill has been shaped and pushed by Sen. Jim Webb, a veteran, who told New York Times columnist Bob Herbert that the first GI Bill returned to the economy $7 for every $1 that was spent funding it.

College is an important gateway to the middle class and we can hardly think of any group of people more deserving of this country’s help in attending college than the young men and women who volunteered to serve our country during a time of war.

There’s been way more than enough written about Donald Trump’s battle with kneeling football players — especially with a major crisis underway in Puerto Rico — but one thing really does bother me that’s been revealed during this brouhaha: the extent to which many Americans have accepted the anti-democratic and false equivalence of patriotism and the military.